Jump to content

Did the Rams underpay for Donald or the Bears overpay for Mack


patriotsheatyan

Recommended Posts

I think both paid fair value. The difference between the two contracts are really negligible, honestly. $1M per year is incredibly minor in terms of the overall deals. Not a big enough difference to constitute a gap of one being underpaid or overpaid but the other being at fair value. It was the typical situation where Mack got paid second so he got paid more. It was pretty much known from the start that's what would happened. It's probably part of why both took so long. You want to see the other guy get paid first so you can ask for slightly more than that. Let's you both say you got the biggest contract ever at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Donald has a bigger defensive impact than Mack, but both guys surpass the threshold of defensive impact where would I worry much about money. You simply pony up and pay players of their caliber, quite literally at all costs. In this case, Donald set the market, and then Mack got a tiny bit more than him, so I suppose you could say Mack got overpaid, but it's pretty negligible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/2/2018 at 9:30 PM, jrry32 said:

Rams paid Donald appropriately. Bears overpaid for Mack, and I don't mean the picks.

I don't agree.  That's how contracts in sports work sometimes.  Donald signed first and Mack signed after him.  Had it been the other way around, Donald would be making slightly more money.  Two years from now, or whenever another elite defender time to sign, they'll sign for more than Mack.  They both deserve the money they got.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, showtime said:

I don't agree.  That's how contracts in sports work sometimes.  Donald signed first and Mack signed after him.  Had it been the other way around, Donald would be making slightly more money.  Two years from now, or whenever another elite defender time to sign, they'll sign for more than Mack.  They both deserve the money they got.

Mack isn't on the same level as Donald in my mind. It would be like Aaron Rodgers getting $30 million a year and then Philip Rivers getting $31 million a year imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

Mack isn't on the same level as Donald in my mind. It would be like Aaron Rodgers getting $30 million a year and then Philip Rivers getting $31 million a year imo.

In my mind, Aaron Donald is the best defensive player in the league and he is alone as #1, but I believe Khalil Mack is the second best defensive player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, showtime said:

In my mind, Aaron Donald is the best defensive player in the league and he is alone as #1, but I believe Khalil Mack is the second best defensive player. 

I don't share the same opinion. I think he's likely a top 5 defensive player, though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both contracts are acceptable for a top five overall defender in the NFL today.  I don't think anyone can argue that.  

Two first round picks carry a lot of value, but what are the chances of the Raiders hitting on a player who has half of the impact that Mack has?  The hit/miss rate on first rounders is bad enough to begin with, and I personally do not see either of these as top 8 picks where a player like Mack is going to be taken.  I actually thought the Bears got him for a bargain.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...